A simple question, you might imagine. Activists from three of the largest campaign groups on women’s rights @WomensRightsNet @WomenUnitingUK @SexMattersOrg are urging the public to demand EVERY politician standing in next month’s elections can answer that simple question.
Local elections are happening on 5th May 2022.
“Tell candidates: Respect My Sex If You Want My ‘X’!”
The simple answer to this question is of course YES. It is surprising that the leader of the Labour Party Sir Keir Starmer was unable to answer such a simple question.
Read more at the Daily Mail
In June 2022 Keir Starmer said on LBC ‘vast majority’ of women ‘don’t have a penis‘ and need safe spaces
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu0pAp0Z9vo
Read our review of Gavin Howe Barrister
Latest Articles
- Senior President of Tribunals
The Senior President of Tribunals is the independent and statutory leader of the tribunal judiciary. The office of the Senior… Read more: Senior President of Tribunals - Solicitor General
The Solicitor General is the second law officer of the Crown in the United Kingdom, after the Attorney General. The… Read more: Solicitor General - R v Sussex Justices
“It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but… Read more: R v Sussex Justices - What is Section 35 ABCP Act 2014 ?
Section 35 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 grants police officers the power to direct a person… Read more: What is Section 35 ABCP Act 2014 ?
One reply on “Can a Woman have a Penis?”
There are two matters here, the first being the Starmer creature’s action and statement. As with all manifestations of the sub-genus , [italics on] homus duplicitatis [italics off], this self-styled “leader” says that he welcomes and believes in “open discussion”. Except, Not Right Now because “it wouldn’t be helpful”.
Remember Orwell’s “doublespeak”? Yevgeny Zamyatin wrote about it in 1924; his novel “We” (romanised often as “I”), foreshadowing G.O. It’s non- Newtonian, and means Action and Stated Intention are seldom consistent.
Women and penises? Why not?
It’s a fact of life that homo sapiens is an inquisitive creature. That restless pondering can, and does, lead anywhere and everywhere. It’s simply human nature.
From dental anaesthetic to internet pornography; instant messaging to almost instant gratification; an open encyclopaedia of everything to local community lost cat notifications, omnes illico oculos vestros.
Sooner or later it inevitably happens that something unusual pops up. In this case, it can be seen as a natural progression of organ replacement precedents. Men wishing to be female have been reported as having their sexual organs surgically removed, to be replaced by a sculpted cavity. Well, good luck with that; the only possible objection I would have concerns the payments for such a thing. If no taxpayer subsidy is provided, and the individual funds the process in full with all associated medications, care and so on, then it’s not really any of my business.
The same applies to my thinking about females who want a more permanent and physical attachment to a particular male organ, as long as the donor is willing or, being dead, has donated himself for harvesting.
They say that, in history, there is nothing new, which would mean that such cross-structuring has likely been attempted many times before. Why should I object to any private self-funded ambitions today?
They also say that if my aunt had nuts she’d be my uncle.
Henry Ford is quoted as saying “…most of history is bunk…”
Go gently amid the noise; rotate your tyres; listen for the symphony of the spheres.
db DD